Re: Why, at least, serialization?

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Alex Co<[email protected]> wrote:

> I just have one idea that is operate on LUS default implementation. May be the
> LUS could start accept ALSO other form of things which are not serializable
> objects .

Since Jini implementation is now sitting in Apache River project, you
could of course add your own extensions to it, and totally
disregarding what the spec mandates. The upside is that you can
control everything, and the downside is no interoperability and
possibly long term maintenace problems.

So, for instance, as part of the Discovery/Join phase, you could for
instance use UPnP (or a home brewed mechanism) to discover the LUS,
and modify Reggie to support other protocols than RMI. I am not sure
how resource contrained you are, but perhaps xstream or some json
system would be possible to handle the serialization. You could also
check out an old alternative RMI implementation (AltRMI, sitting in
Apache Incubator as a project failing to create a community) for ideas
on how to do the method dispatch system and perhaps use AltRMI as a
base, then swap out the serialization with a json one and manage to
squeeze that into your device.
You could for instance opt to disallow support for some Lookup Service
features, such as Entries and Events, and perhaps try to reach a
'primitives only' solution at service interface levels.


Cheers
-- 
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java

I  live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I  work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Getting Started:     http://www.jini.org/wiki/Category:Getting_Started
Community Web Site:  http://jini.org
jini-users Archive:  http://archives.java.sun.com/archives/jini-users.html
Unsubscribing:       email "signoff JINI-USERS"  to [email protected]